An experiment i was thinking of

[Aculaud 0]

I was visiting my mother this weekend for the mothers day, and we were watching saving private ryan, and got into a small discussion about what it would be like to have some form of modern technology on our side in world war 2. It got me thinking about something....

What if we had even one substantial squad of soldiers with modern day, 21st century technology, complete with everything they need: Weapons, ammo, medical supplies, rations, means of insertion\extraction, etc. How far could they be pushed until there were none left? Would it even make any difference? would it not? would they single handedly win the war? what do you think?

I was thinking about something like this

-6 riflemen with current versions of the OICW and standard kits aside from that

-2 demo guys with bare bones M4 SOPMODs with some accurate optics, and maybe some other accessories, also carrying AT4 launchers.

-2 machine gunners, maybe one with an M240b, and one with an M249, or both with M240b's

-1 sniper with an M-40A3, or M24, or Tango 51

-1 dedicated medic with an M4\M203 combo.

I know it sounds like something out of ghost recon, but how do you think something like that would fare back then? what would you change, if anything?

[Guest]

I think that a lot of WW2 was won by the shere masses of soldiers involved. Modern infantry units would have made very little difference. Aircraft, tanks, ships, subs and nukes would have made a difference.

[Warin 0]

I have to agree with Denoir on this one. Unless you were talking about a modern mechanized brigade, I dont think the difference in weapons technology would make a huge amount of difference. A squad would likely get wiped out assaulting the first hedgerow they hit.

Now, if you had a wing of A-6's, I bet you could pulverize either side in rather short order.

A movie based on this premise is Final Countdown. Nimitz gets sucked through a temporal disturbance and pops up in the south pacific on December 6th, 1941. Not the best movie of all time, but worth a watch.

[Mister Frag 0]

I too agree with the previous assessments. The infantry weapons used during WWII weren't that inferior compared to today's equipment.

The biggest advantage that a modern squad would have had would have been the communications gear and fighting at night -- the US loves to fight at night, and even though some NV gear existed towards the end of WWII, it wasn't really beyond the experimental stage.

Other than that, all sides of the conflict had grenades, mortars, AT weapons, battle rifles that were good out to at least 200 meters (all that is needed most of the time), and some scoped rifles for marksmen.

During a daytime engagement, sheer numbers would have won the game.

[Aculaud 0]

Yeah, saving private ryan was on my mind when i thought of this. That last scene where they hold the bridge, i saw a gross amount of anti-tank capabilities missing. That could have really been helped by even a couple AT4's, which would be where the demo guys come in. If they had taken out the tanks, they would have had a HUGE leg up. Jackson would have survived, and probably taken out a hell of a lot more infantry than he did, captain miller wouldnt have died, cause he wouldnt have gotten shell shocked by the tank round that hit the alamo towards the final stages of that battle, etc.

I dunno, maybe it was destined to happen no matter what.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ May 14 2002,02:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A movie based on this premise is Final Countdown.  Nimitz gets sucked through a temporal disturbance and pops up in the south pacific on December 6th, 1941.  Not the best movie of all time, but worth a watch.<span id='postcolor'>

Coool... I'll have to see it.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ May 14 2002,02:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ May 14 2002,02:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A movie based on this premise is Final Countdown.  Nimitz gets sucked through a temporal disturbance and pops up in the south pacific on December 6th, 1941.  Not the best movie of all time, but worth a watch.<span id='postcolor'>

Coool... I'll have to see it. <span id='postcolor'>

nah, its boring, u dont get to see any fighting

would have been cool though, a squadrion of tomcats downing the entire japanese navy airforce

[GFX707 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aculaud @ May 14 2002,01:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I was visiting my mother this weekend for the mothers day, and we were watching saving private ryan, and got into a small discussion about what it would be like to have some form of modern technology on our side in world war 2. It got me thinking about something....

What if we had even one substantial squad of soldiers with modern day, 21st century technology, complete with everything they need: Weapons, ammo, medical supplies, rations, means of insertion\extraction, etc. How far could they be pushed until there were none left? Would it even make any difference? would it not? would they single handedly win the war? what do you think?

I was thinking about something like this

-6 riflemen with current versions of the OICW and standard kits aside from that

-2 demo guys with bare bones M4 SOPMODs with some accurate optics, and maybe some other accessories

-2 machine gunners, maybe one with an M240b, and one with an M249, or both with M240b's

-1 sniper with an M-40A3, or M24, or Tango 51

-1 dedicated medic with an M4\M203 combo.

I know it sounds like something out of ghost recon, but how do you think something like that would fare back then? what would you change, if anything?<span id='postcolor'>

D-Day in modern times would involve americans sitting 20 miles away in a carrier nice and safe where the enemy can't see them, and firing long range missiles at them. And of course substitute Germany with some defenceless third world country

/me runs away

[GFX707 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mister Frag @ May 14 2002,02:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the US loves to fight at night, and even though some NV gear existed towards the end of WWII, it wasn't really beyond the experimental stage.<span id='postcolor'>

What about that whole daylight bombing thing in WWII....?

lol

well I guess everyone makes mistakes

[USSoldier11B 0]

D-Day would have resulted in a lot less allied casualties if bunker busting technology had existed then. Sure, they hit the beaches with Naval gunfire for a few hours before the invasion, but those pillboxes were damn thick. With today's bomb technology, our guys would have landed on the beach amid barbequed krauts.

[Aculaud 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (USSoldier11B @ May 13 2002,19:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">D-Day would have resulted in a lot less allied casualties if bunker busting technology had existed then. Sure, they hit the beaches with Naval gunfire for a few hours before the invasion, but those pillboxes were damn thick. With today's bomb technology, our guys would have landed on the beach amid barbequed krauts. <span id='postcolor'>

Yeah, really! We'd be like...

Pilot to bombardier, 1000 lb laser guided bomb lock on THIS brick in enemy bunker.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Personally, Id like to see what a few Green Beret A-Teams could have done during the Revolutionary War

[Grey Fox 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ May 13 2002,22:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Personally, Id like to see what a few Green Beret A-Teams could have done during the Revolutionary War<span id='postcolor'>

All the British Generals would be dead in a month with a whole shitload of ships c4 ed in the harbors.

[USSoldier11B 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Personally, Id like to see what a few Green Beret A-Teams could have done during the Revolutionary War

<span id='postcolor'>

Ever hear of Roger's Rangers during the French and Indian War? He implimented alot of innovative ideas for the time. A kind of guerrila warefare. Rather than lining up in rank and file and shooting each other to shit. The standing orders of Col. Robert Rogers are still a big part of U.S. Army Ranger doctrine.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Standing Orders

1. Don't forget nothing.

 

2. Have your musket clean as a whistle, hatchet scoured, sixty rounds powder and ball, and be ready to march at a minute's warning.

 

3. When you're on the march, act the way you would if you was sneaking up on a deer. See the enemy first.

 

4.Tell the truth about what you see and what you do. There is an army depending on us for correct information.

 

5.You can lie all you please when you tell other folks about the Rangers, but don't never lie to a Ranger or officer.

 

6. Don't never take a chance you don't have to.

 

7. When we're on the march we march single file, far enough apart so one shot can't go through two men.

 

8. If we strike swamps, or soft ground, we spread out abreast, so it's hard to track us.

 

9.When we march, we keep moving till dark, so as to give the enemy the least possible chance at us.

 

10. When we camp, half the party stays awake while the other half sleeps.

 

11. If we take prisoners, we keep 'em separate till we have had time to examine them, so they can't cook up a story between 'em.

 

12. Don't ever march home the same way. Take a different route so you won't be ambushed.

 

13. No matter whether we travel in big parties or little ones, each party has to keep a scout 20 yards ahead, 20 yards on each flank, and 20 yards in the rear so the main body can't be surprised and wiped out.

 

14. Every night you'll be told where to meet if surrounded by a superior force.

 

15. Don't sit down to eat without posting sentries.

 

16. Don't sleep beyond dawn. Dawn's when the French and Indians attack.

 

17. Don't cross a river by a regular ford.

 

18. If somebody's trailing you, make a circle, come back onto your own tracks, and ambush the folks that aim to ambush you.

 

19. Don't stand up when the enemy's coming against you. Kneel down, lie down, hide behind a tree.

 

20. Let the enemy come till he's almost close enough to touch. Then let him have it and jump out and finish him up with your hatchet.

<span id='postcolor'>

#19 is my favorite. Like duh, someone should have figured that one out sooner. Here we she the birth of fieldcraft and tactical discpline.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

yeah, Ive read up on Roberts Rangers. They didnt always have the best level of success though

[Assault (CAN) 1]

I would change the M4's with M-16s and also arm them with AT4 'CS's Which are cabable of being fired from an enclosed space. That would probably do a good number on any German tank.

Well, they'd be wearing all the latest body armour and have all the latest NVG kit. So, I would only use them at night. It would also be a good idea for them to carry MP5SD's so they could have silent weaons. Since the MP5 is in 9mm, they could pick up ammo off the Germans if need be.

Now that I think of it, you should try and keep the ammo to 2 different calibres to ease supply problems. So, give them AR-10B's and M-240's, MP5SD's and a Beretta 9mm's or FN Hi-Power 9mm's. That would keep the calibres to 7.62x51 NATO (linked and single round) and 9mm.

It might even be a better idea to adapt the weapons to use German ammo. So, change the M-240 to accept 8mm Mauser/linked ammo. Same goes for the AR-10, you could change it to accept 8mm Mauser or the 8mm short round that was used in the StG44.

A platoon of M1A2's could do some serious damage though. Hey, maybe it would be cool if the P-51 or P-47 or Spitfire were modified to carry 4 or 6 Stinger AA missles?

...I put way too much thought into this, lol.

Tyler

[Tovarish 0]

A bit of a flaw in your logic there Assault, the MP5 is a German design

[Assault (CAN) 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the MP5 is a German design<span id='postcolor'>

So? There was no rule against it being German

Well, the gun on the Abrams is German too.

[sn1per 0]

Noo, you're all wrong. I would have given the Gerrys attack helicopters

[Aculaud 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ May 13 2002,22:01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would change the M4's with M-16s and also arm them with AT4 'CS's Which are cabable of being fired from an enclosed space. That would probably do a good number on any German tank.

Well, they'd be wearing all the latest body armour and have all the latest NVG kit. So, I would only use them at night. It would also be a good idea for them to carry MP5SD's so they could have silent weaons. Since the MP5 is in 9mm, they could pick up ammo off the Germans if need be.

Now that I think of it, you should try and keep the ammo to 2 different calibres to ease supply problems. So, give them AR-10B's and M-240's, MP5SD's and a Beretta 9mm's or FN Hi-Power 9mm's. That would keep the calibres to 7.62x51 NATO (linked and single round) and 9mm.

It might even be a better idea to adapt the weapons to use German ammo. So, change the M-240 to accept 8mm Mauser/linked ammo. Same goes for the AR-10, you could change it to accept 8mm Mauser or the 8mm short round that was used in the StG44.

A platoon of M1A2's could do some serious damage though. Hey, maybe it would be cool if the P-51 or P-47 or Spitfire were modified to carry 4 or 6 Stinger AA missles?

...I put way too much thought into this, lol.

Tyler<span id='postcolor'>

well, the M4 SOPMOD (Special Operations Peculier Modifications) is capable of accepting a silencer, so since 3 people would be carrying them, you could easily use them for silent take downs if the situation called for it. a 5.56 round would be a hell of a lot better than a 9mm round in any outdoor situation.

And my experiment wouldnt be limited by ammo, it would be limited by life. I was thinking about how far you could push a squad of this kind before they were gone, not before they were out of ammo, so changing the ammo typed wouldnt be necissary. They'd have all they needed.

And yeah, i meant to say the Demo guys would be carrying AT4's. Sorry, i'll go change that.

[sn1per 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aculaud @ May 14 2002,09:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">well, the M4 SOPMOD (Special Operations Peculier Modifications) is capable of accepting a silencer, so since 3 people would be carrying them, you could easily use them for silent take downs if the situation called for it. a 5.56 round would be a hell of a lot better than a 9mm round in any outdoor situation.

And my experiment wouldnt be limited by ammo, it would be limited by life. I was thinking about how far you could push a squad of this kind before they were gone, not before they were out of ammo, so changing the ammo typed wouldnt be necissary. They'd have all they needed.

And yeah, i meant to say the Demo guys would be carrying AT4's. Sorry, i'll go change that.<span id='postcolor'>

Wouldn't the AT-4 be a bit too powerful and too heavy? I'd give the squad something like this:

AN-94 + GP25

SAW/Minimi

SVD, Barret

RPG-18 aka Mukha - Disposable version

RPG-22 - Disposable version

The tanks did not have that reactive armor or anything, so they would be quite vulnerable to basic hollow charges in RPG (or western equivalent) And mukha can be used against bunkers and fortifications.

I Guess one infantry battalion with modern fighting technology could have done a lot in WW2  

[Aculaud 0]

well, the AT4 weighs 15 pounds if that means anything. properly balanced on an ALICE pack or a ruck sack, and i wouldnt think it'd be TOO much trouble. Especially since the squad consists of 12 guys, so others with less kit could carry some of your equipment in a pinch.

I may be wrong about this, so correct me if so, but in tom clancy's ghost recon it was also re-loadable which means the two guys that carry them in my hypathetical squad could easily take out a whole squad of tanks with support from everyone else.

[Oligo 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aculaud @ May 14 2002,02:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yeah, saving private ryan was on my mind when i thought of this. That last scene where they hold the bridge, i saw a gross amount of anti-tank capabilities missing. That could have really been helped by even a couple AT4's, which would be where the demo guys come in. If they had taken out the tanks, they would have had a HUGE leg up. Jackson would have survived, and probably taken out a hell of a lot more infantry than he did, captain miller wouldnt have died, cause he wouldnt have gotten shell shocked by the tank round that hit the alamo towards the final stages of that battle, etc.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, the ending battle of Saving Private Ryan is not the epithome of realism anyway. I don't think ze germans had any more tendencies to run mindlessly into slaughter, than the average G.I. Joe. Unfortunately that is what they do in the movie.

The tigers weren't really that sucky.

[Aculaud 0]

well, two things you must consider.

One, they ran mindlessly into slaughter and nearly won.

Two, did they really know what they were going into? I mean, the infantry was huddled down low behind the armor as if trouble could be right around the corner, but you have take into account weather or not they actually knew the numbers of forces involved in the ambush or weather or not they even knew if one was coming.

I did an experiment one time in OFP where i placed three guys, a soldier with an XMS, a machine gunner and a sniper on this liitle hillside with an advancing squad of 12 enemy soldiers. Every enemy got killed, while the three guys didnt take a single hit, and i didnt help at all. this just goes to show that inferior numbers can easily overcome if positioned correctly with the right weapons and skills to back them up. this is one thing i had in mind while thinking about all this.

[Oligo 1]

"Two, did they really know what they were going into? I mean, the infantry was huddled down low behind the armor as if trouble could be right around the corner, but you have take into account weather or not they actually knew the numbers of forces involved in the ambush or weather or not they even knew if one was coming."

The germans had plenty of city fighting experience. Does Stalingrad ring a bell? Nevertheless, I'm not talking about the surprise factor and all that. I'm talking about the germans seeing tens of their pals being blown away by snipers and bombs and whatnot and the morons still stayed in the streets, running over the bodies of their comrades. Do you really think that they would not have entered the ruined buildings and advanced in the cover provided by them?

Furthermore, unless the german commander was a moron, tanks would never advance in cities without being completely covered by infantry. Which means that the infantry goes in first and looks into every nook and cranny, looking for that lone dupe with the bazooka.

And my last point. Tanks have machine guns. You can even see that in the movie. But for some reason, the german commander had issued orders that they should not be used. Just look carefully, the machine guns never fire. Considering that they are the main anti-infantry weapons of tanks... you catch my drift.